Cisne writes

Image: Mason Kimbarovsky on Unsplash

We set the scene: four epileptics sitting in a Discord server, bitching about the way movies seem to want us dead. This week’s topic is Space Jam: A New Legacy, but we have had this exact conversation many times before: we had it with Incredibles 2, we had it with Into the Spider-verse, we had it with The Mitchells vs. the Machines, we had it with Cyberpunk 2077, and we will keep having it for a long time: modern media has too many strobes and too little warnings.

Learning about the hazards present in modern media tends to follow the same formula nearly every time: the movie, show, or videogame is released as usual, at some point a viewer expresses concern over the effects used in it. Usually, this viewer has a photosensitive loved one, or is photosensitive themself, which resolves with the warning traveling across social media after someone has already suffered from a seizure, as it was the case with Incredibles 2, Cyberpunk 2077, Cruella, and most recently Space Jam: A New Legacy.

Sometimes companies will issue an official warning, but they tend to be reduced to an online statement and a piece of paper at the entrance of the movie theater advising viewer discretion. Other times, like in the case of Into the Spider-verse and Space Jam: A New Legacy, no official warning is ever issued. Official warning or not, the “courtesy” of a warning rarely comes on time.

Let us rewind and go back to our tiny-group discussions. The questions we have are always the same: what do these big companies want in exchange for a timely warning? And what will it take for people to stop claiming that we are censoring artists by asking for safer media? An unfortunate mix of events made me come up with a terrible idea that might just work.

“Epileptic reacts to strobes” I type into the server.

“They might take actual notice for once” someone replies, “Considering how protest in the past usually doesn’t get noticed until you nearly kill yourself”.

Next thing I know I am actually considering the idea, thinking and overthinking the possible outcomes; on one hand, if this hypothetical reaction were to gain traction, we could increase awareness and create an actual impact. On the other, I don’t feel like further endangering my brain, and I don’t want to encourage other photosensitive people to follow suit. Because that’s what it is, epilepsy is a neurological disorder, and every seizure is a punch to the brain. People can die during a seizure, it’s not uncommon to hear it as a cause of death… Why is a potential death my ticket to be noticed?

Let’s go further away, let’s go to the kind of attention I would get based on the kind of attention I have received in the past over comments in social media: a few people getting the point, many people telling me I should just not watch, and the restless fans of strobes berating me about how I am censoring artistic vision, to which I respond every time: thank you for being a reasonable person, I wouldn’t watch if I had a proper warning, and that is not how censorship works.

There is also the answer I am yet to receive, but the one that many people have already experienced: blatant assault. I wish I were exaggerating.

Last year, journalist and fellow epileptic Liana Ruppert published the article “Cyberpunk 2077 Epileptic PSA” for Game Informer, where she related her experience suffering a seizure while playing the videogame. The good part about this story is that CD Projekt Red, the studio behind the game, reached to her to improve the game’s accessibility. The bad one? People started to send her GIFs with flashing lights with the explicit purpose of inducing a seizure.

As it turns out, an epileptic reacting to strobes is not the powerful PSA one imagines.

Image: Liana Ruppert

Don’t get me wrong, Liana Ruppert had a great impact on Cyberpunk 2077. As it was mentioned, the studio contacted her to get input about how to make the game safer for photosensitive people, and most of the suggested changes were adopted, including the muting of some colors and the addition of a warning at the start of the videogame, but there are still some harmful effects in the videogame with no way to turn them off.

Improvements were made, but it’s still such a little change in the grand scheme of things: there is still a long way to go in terms of awareness and choice. There are still no formal regulations that require companies to warn for potential seizure inducing content, the closest we get to that is the way the UK and Japan refuse to distribute material that hasn’t passed the Harding Test, which scans the content and flags this kind of material. Many movies have been altered in order to be able to pass the test, but those new, safer versions are only ever distributed in the UK and Japan, how do they expect us to think these are innocent mistakes when they have alternative versions ready for the countries that force them to act safer, but for the rest of the world they keep using the one that has been proven to induce seizures? I am all for creative freedom and the use of strobes and bright colors in situations that call for them, but I am also an advocate for freedom of choice, these companies have the means to create and offer alternative versions of their media to their public, movie theaters already offer 3D and 4D experiences, streaming services offer interactive shows, and videogames are the peak of experience diversity, why don’t they add seizure free experiences to their endless list of innovation? Why don’t they allow us to choose an experience that doesn’t end with us in a hospital bed? Why do we have to get hurt to be noticed?

Image: TV Tokyo, 1997

In December 1997, around 700 people were hospitalized in Japan after the first and only airing of the episode Electric Soldier Porygon from Pokémon. According to publications in various newspapers from the time, the patients presented cases of seizures, conscience loss, bloody vomit, migraines, and even memory loss. All of this after twenty minutes from the beginning of the episode, concurring with a scene where the colors onscreen changed drastically fifty-four times in less than five seconds.

After this event, Japan’s health ministry suspended the airing of the show nearly during a year. At the same time, investigations were started under the suspicion of negligence on TV Tokyo’s part, as this company oversaw its diffusion.

Many doctors identified the symptoms as episodes of television epilepsy, best known as photosensitive epilepsy, which is triggered by diverse light effects, including stroboscopic lights, or strobes, like the ones used during the episode. This theory was confirmed when studying the medical history of those affected, reason why the broadcasting of the episode was globally forbidden while various Japanese animation studios established guidelines which should be abided by every animated show in hopes to avoid a repetition of the event.

This incident took place during the show’s first year of airing and, although its fame hadn’t reach the level that it possesses actually, it had already managed to become one of the most watched shows at the time, especially among kids and teenagers, whereby it is not surprising the majority of the victims where minors, even less once photosensitive epilepsy’s nature -and even epilepsy’s in general-, is taken into consideration, as this condition is often developed during childhood and, in many cases, there’s the possibility of being outgrown.

In general terms, epilepsy is a nervous system disorder in which the brain sends abnormal signals that result in the temporary loss of control over brain coordinated processes. These episodes are called seizures or epileptic crises.

Although the term “seizure” has been made popular in mass media as violent body shakes and conscience loss, this is only one way the condition can be presented. Other epileptic crises are: absence seizures, characterized by the momentary loss of consciousness; tonic seizures, which cause muscular stiffness; atonic, causing of falls due to loss of muscular tone; clonic, presenting repetitive and involuntary muscle movements; myoclonic, or sudden limb spasms; focal without memory loss (or simple partials), altering the senses and creating spontaneous movements; and, finally, focal with memory loss (or complex partials), which cause fainting spells and repetitive movements.

It is worth noting that the different seizure types are solely symptoms, and therefore the usage of strobes does not cause epilepsy, but trigger the symptoms and, even if these are not the disorder itself, they can be dangerous on their own account by exposing the affected to a bigger brain damage.

Not every person who suffers from epilepsy is also photosensitive but, since this condition affects the nervous system, they can present sensorial sensibility, which is also challenged by strobes. In addition to this, kids between one and fifteen years are the most prone to develop photosensitivity when they possess a genetic predisposition to epilepsy and are exposed to this kind of effects.

The available information about photosensitive epilepsy has done nothing but grow since the events elicited by the famously forbidden Pokémon episode, turning strobes as seizure triggers as a piece of general culture. At the same time, multiple guides about ways to avoid triggering seizures with audiovisual content have been developed.

Among the recommendations emitted by professionals on the area are:

• Flashing sequences must not last more than five seconds (includes sudden color changes, especially red and blue).
• Flashing sequences must not use more than three or four flashes per second when they cover more than 25% of the screen.
• The movement of contrasting color patterns or uniform text must be avoided when they cover more than 25% of the screen.
• Contrasting color patterns or uniform text must not be used in more than 40% of the screen.

These recommendations apply to television, movies, concerts, and web content.

Regardless of this, Pokémon was not the first nor the last piece of audiovisual content to trigger seizures on its public. On the contrary, the usage of strobe lights has been popularized in the last few years, including its prolonged application in movies and shows aimed to kids.

The Incredibles (2004) is a kid’s movie produced by Walt Disney Pictures and Pixar Animation Studios. This film not only represented a big box-office success, but it continued the trend of both studios to develop new technologies for every project. In this case, character skin effects were improved, and innovative hair and clothing simulations were created.

More than ten years later, this movie’s sequel came to theaters, attracting people of all ages, showing once more their ability to improve digital animation in a short amount of time, especially when Pixar is involved.

Despite this, the responsibility techniques from both production houses didn’t follow the same pattern, because the day of its premiere many audience members reported through social media the constant usage of strobes during the movie.

At least five scenes with flashing sequences, all with a duration between fifteen and ninety seconds, representing three and eighteen times more length than the recommended maximum, not mentioning that, according to the audience, said scenes were vital to comprehend the plot.

Before June 15^th, 2018, day of the premiere, no warning about strobe lights was given through any medium; not in the trailer, not in box-office, not even a message prior to the showings. The warnings were started by audience members after the premiere and many cases of seizures inside of the theatres. After this, Disney emitted a notice inviting theaters to use a photosensitivity warning at box-office.

Beyond being different content from different studios, Pokémon and The Incredibles 2 have two clear differences: the available information, and the implemented measures.

It doesn’t have to be spelt out: 1997 and 2018 were very different years. Not only internet access was limited in 1997, the only instance of any popular audiovisual material causing seizures on its consumers prior to Pokémon was in 1981 with the videogame Space Invader, phenomenon registered in a medical journal of the time which, to this day, is hard to obtain. In addition to this, it seems like said case wasn’t as documented as the caused by Electric Soldier Porygon.

Despite being able to disassociate from any responsibility by being a little-known fact, TV Tokyo decided to maintain its integrity by forbidding the episode in question and cancelling the TV show during a year with the goal to focus that time into performing investigations to prevent the repetition of the event, in addition to joining forces with other Japanese studios to regulate content, helping perform more studies about photosensitive epilepsy, showing respect for their audience.

Coming to 2018, the knowledge about photosensitivity and ways to prevent seizures is higher, as it should be expected after twenty years of one of the most significative events for the epileptic community. At the same time, it’s rare to meet someone without an internet connection, yet the number of titles that employ stroboscopic lights, and the access to them, keeps increasing: Stranger things (2016), American Horror Story (2011), Sense8 (2015), Mad Max: Fury Road (2015), and Breaking Dawn part 1 (2011), are only a few of the audiovisual pieces that caused seizures in their public before the premiere of The Incredibles 2.

The damage caused by this movie not only could have been avoided through comparation and simple common sense, there are multiple guides on the best practices to avoid triggering seizures, as well as an automatized test through a Harding machine, and an online version of the same.

According to its website, the Harding test, developed by Cambridge’s research team, analyzes videos in search of specific seizure provoking patterns, generating a certificate that settles whether the film is safe or not.

The biggest problem related to this test is its elevated price, which is an impediment for independent productions, but certainly not for Disney; The Incredibles 2 has a 120 minutes length, films of this duration require a payment of 130 pounds sterling, around 162.04 US dollars. The budget for this movie was 200 million dollars.

Even if it was a case of economical restraint, the United Kingdom and Japan require to pass the Harding test before getting approval to distribute any audiovisual material. The Incredibles 2 premiered in both countries, but the movie that was shown was edited to decrease the stroboscopic effects without altering the plot.

Not only the test was performed before the premiere, but the original version was used in the rest of the world regardless of its failing grade, and without employing any warning before the seizure cases. Is it necessary to explain why this decision could be considered blatant negligence?

It’s incredible to notice that TV Tokyo took better measures in 1997, when there was virtually no information available. Way better than Disney and Pixar, multimillionaire enterprises, in 2018 and with access to hundreds of studies performed across twenty years.

According to law and bioethics doctor Eleonora Lamm, human dignity “Implies the necessity of every human being to be treated on a stance of equality and the opportunity to enjoy the fundamental rights that derive from them”. Isn’t health a fundamental right?

Many advocates of this and many other seizure inducing films argue that the creator’s artistic vision shouldn’t have to be sacrificed to accommodate a few people. This opinion not only shows a lack of empathy, but is also irresponsible, since it attempts against the life and safety of more than a million and a half persons in the world.

Artistic vision is important, but the line needs to be drawn where other people’s rights start. In other words, if the way you choose to express yourself ends up with someone at the hospital, your artistic vision should take a back seat.

Let’s also consider that exposition to stroboscopic lights can be so harmful, in 1997 Japan’s army tried to develop a weapon based on them. This is not about censorship. It is not even about banning strobe lights, but about its regulation; strobes have good uses within the deaf community, helping them to enjoy concerts, and employing them as smoke alarms or even alarm clocks.

However, there is a big difference between their employment for emergencies and/or domestic situations, where the users are conscious of their existence, and using them in front of people with no warning during recreative activities.

Creators should have all the freedom to develop their artistic vision as long as they follow the existing guidelines on the number and proportion of flashing scenes on screen, as well as giving a clear, timely, and accurate notice of its usage and nature, providing on site methods to mitigate any adverse effects that may arise on people who are not aware of their condition. It’s from those warnings that audiences can decide the content they consume, and demand safe versions of it.

Furthermore, these alternate versions should be the norm at public spaces, reserving the special effects for DVD and streaming services as a special feature of the same, but never being applied  to content marketed to minors, as this is the group with more risk of photosensitive epilepsy.

We are in a situation where we cannot afford to ignore recommendations for content creation, the events related to strobe lights in mass media should be motive enough to take action, since we forgot so quickly about what happened after Electric Soldier Porygon and allowed these effects to be used in an irresponsible manner and become a cinematographic trend.

It’s not only about avoiding seizures on those who already suffer epilepsy, it’s avoiding kids developing it and making sure adults who outgrew it won’t relapse due to constant exposition, losing their driver’s license and even their livelihood.

November is epilepsy awareness month, but the events and research are of no use if the community remains ignored. We have all the necessary resources to decrease the numbers, we could live in a world that’s safe from seizures, we only need to understand that artistic vision is not superior to health.